Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics

, Volume 76, Issue 2, pp 304–321

How do we select multiple features? Transient costs for selecting two colors rather than one, persistent costs for color–location conjunctions

Article

Abstract

In a previous study Lo, Howard, & Holcombe (Vision Research 63:2033, 2012), selecting two colors did not induce a performance cost, relative to selecting one color. For example, requiring possible report of both a green and a red target did not yield a worse performance than when both targets were green. Yet a cost of selecting multiple colors was observed when selection needed be contingent on both color and location. When selecting a red target to the left and a green target to the right, superimposing a green distractor to the left and a red distractor to the right impeded performance. Possibly, participants cannot confine attention to a color at a particular location. As a result, distractors that share the target colors disrupt attentional selection of the targets. The attempt to select the targets must then be repeated, which increases the likelihood that the trial terminates when selection is not effective, even for long trials. Consistent with this, here we find a persistent cost of selecting two colors when the conjunction of color and location is needed, but the cost is confined to short exposure durations when the observer just has to monitor red and green stimuli without the need to use the location information. These results suggest that selecting two colors is time-consuming but effective, whereas selection of simultaneous conjunctions is never entirely successful.

Keywords

Feature-based attention Perceptual lag Multiple-feature cost Resource theory Mixture model 

References

  1. Adamo, M., Pun, C., Pratt, J., & Ferber, S. (2008). Your divided attention, please! The maintenance of multiple attentional control sets over distinct regions in space. Cognition, 107(1), 295–303.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvarez, G. A., & Cavanagh, P. (2005). Independent resources for attentional tracking in the left and right visual hemifields. Psychological Science, 16(8), 637–643.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Arman, A. C., Ciaramitaro, V. M., & Boynton, G. M. (2006). Effects of feature-based attention on the motion aftereffect at remote locations. Vision Research, 46(18), 2968–2976.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Awh, E., Belopolsky, A. V., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). Top-down versus bottom-up attentional control: A failed theoretical dichotomy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16(8), 437–443.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Belopolsky, A. V., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2010). What is top-down about contingent capture? Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72(2), 326–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bichot, N. P., Rossi, A. F., & Desimone, R. (2005). Parallel and serial neural mechanisms for visual search in macaque area V4. Science, 308(5721), 529–534.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Blaser, E., Pylyshyn, Z. W., & Holcombe, A. O. (2000). Tracking an object through feature space. Nature, 408, 196–199.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chelazzi, L., Miller, E. K., Duncan, J., & Desimone, R. (1993). A neural basis for visual-search in inferior temporal cortex. Nature, 363(6427), 345–347.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Culham, J. C., Brandt, S. A., Cavanagh, P., Kanwisher, N. G., Dale, A. M., & Tootell, R. B. (1998). Cortical fMRI activation produced by attentive tracking of moving targets. Journal of Neurophysiology, 80(5), 2657–2670.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Folk, C. L., Remington, R. W., & Johnston, J. C. (1992). Involuntary covert orienting is contingent on attentional control settings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18(4), 1030–1044.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Howard, C. J., & Holcombe, A. O. (2008). Tracking the changing features of multiple objects: Progressively poorer perceptual precision and progressively greater perceptual lag. Vision Research, 48(9), 1164–1180.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Huang, L. Q., & Pashler, H. (2007). A Boolean map theory of visual attention. Psychological Review, 114(3), 599–631.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hudson, C., Howe, P. D., & Little, D. R. (2012). Hemifield effects in multiple identity tracking. Plos One, 7(8), e43796.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Irons, J. L., Folk, C. L., & Remington, R. W. (2012). All set! Evidence of simultaneous attentional control settings for multiple target colors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(3), 758–775.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Irons, J. L., & Remington, R. W. (2013). Can attentional control settings be maintained for two color-location conjunctions? Evidence from an RSVP task. Attention Perception & Psychophysics.Google Scholar
  16. Jovicich, J., Peters, R. J., Koch, C., Braun, J., Chang, L., & Ernst, T. (2001). Brain areas specific for attentional load in a motion-tracking task. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 13(8), 1048–1058.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Levene, H. (1960). Robust tests for equality of variances. In I. Olkin (Ed.), Contributions to probability and statistics: Essays in honor of Harold Hotelling (pp. 278–292). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Lo, S. Y., Howard, C. J., & Holcombe, A. O. (2012). Feature-based attentional interference revealed in perceptual errors and lags. Vision Research, 63, 20–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Sàenz, M., Buracas, G. T., & Boynton, G. M. (2002). Global effects of feature-based attention in human visual cortex. Nature Neuroscience, 5(7), 631–632.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Sàenz, M., Buracas, G. T., & Boynton, G. M. (2003). Global feature-based attention for motion and color. Vision Research, 43(6), 629–637.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Straw, A. D. (2008). Vision egg: An open-source library for realtime visual stimulus generation. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 2, 4.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Theeuwes, J., & van der Burg, E. (2011). On the limits of top-down control of visual attention. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 73, 2092–2103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. White, A. L., & Carrasco, M. (2011). Feature-based attention involuntarily and simultaneously improves visual performance across locations. Journal of Vision, 11(6): 15, 1–10.Google Scholar
  24. Wolfe, J. M., Yu, K. P., Stewart, M. I., Shorter, A. D., Friedman-Hill, S. R., & Cave, K. R. (1990). Limitations on the parallel guidance of visual search: color x color and orientation x orientation conjunctions. Journal of experimental psychology: Human perception and performance, 16(4), 879–892.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhang, W. W., & Luck, S. J. (2008). Discrete fixed-resolution representations in visual working memory. Nature, 453, 233–236.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PsychologyThe University of SydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations